In consumer litigation involving personal injury from chemical or gas accidents, the quantum of compensation must be strictly proportional to the physical trauma, length of medical treatment, and actual financial loss incurred by the victim, justifying appellate intervention if original awards are found to be inadequate.

BETWEEN:

AND:

ORAL COMMON ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA, PRESIDENT)

These Appeals are filed U/s.15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short CP Act) by Appellants seeking enhancement of compensation against the orders dated:17.12.2016 respectively passed in CC/138, 139, 140, 141, 142/2014 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chikmagalur (in short the District Commission)

The Appellants are the Complainants and Respondents.1 to 3 were the OPs.1 to 3 before the District Commission. The Rank of the parties shall be referred to as per their status before the District Commission.

The brief facts of the case are that; OP.1 is the LPG gas manufacturer, OP.2 is Insurance Company who has issued nationwide Public Liability Policy (in short PLP) in favour of OP.1. OP.3 is a gas distributor of OP.1. On 04.06.2012, when one of the family members of Sri.A.S.Mohamed Kalandar Shah was fixing the regulator to the new cylinder supplied by OP.3, there was sudden gas leakage, resulting LPG cylinder got burst, caught fire causing injury to the family members and also damage to the house. The Complainants who were present at the time of incident have suffered grievous burn injuries. They were taken to Government Hospital, Aldur, treated at M.G.Hospital, Holy Cross Hospital, Chikmagaluru and Kasturba Hospital. The Complainants were under treatment from 04.06.2012 to 18.06.2012 as inpatients. Complainants in CC/138/2014 and CC/139/2014 have suffered 39% burn injuries. Complainants in CC/140/2014, CC/141/2014, CC/142/2014 have suffered 8%, 14% and 11% burn injuries respectively. Police complaint came to be registered and fire incident was intimated to OPs. OPs.1 & 3 have visited the spot and reported the matter to OP.1 to settle the claim under PLP. Since they have not settled the claim, alleging deficiency in service complaint is filed before the District Commission.

OP.1/manufacturer of LPG gas has opposed the claim by filing version contending that complaint is filed after two years of the incident, thereby complaint is not maintainable. OPs.1 & 3 have entered into dealership agreement. In terms of the said agreement, OP.1 & 3 are responsible for taking insurance policy for the accidents including third party insurance cover to the persons and properties. In addition, OP.1 has taken comprehensive insurance policy i.e. Public Liability Policy for Oil Industries which is having nationwide coverage with limited liability. Whenever an accident takes place, the same would be reported to local office of OP.1, who investigates the cause of accident. Thereafter, OP.2/Insurance Compan